On 5/17/06, Paul Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sections 4.1 describes what is appropriate for standards track;
section 4.2 describes what is appropriate for Informational and
Experimental RFCs.
That's true, but the you asserted the following:
This document describes an extension to an existing standards-track
document: it should either be on standards track or it should not be
an RFC.
Where is that written down?
Don't see it in RFC2026. In fact, I don't see any of the process we're
encountering documented there.
I'm disappointed you didn't answer the more interesting and relevant
questions in my previous message.
--
Robert Sayre
